Gordon Sussman v. Jenkins, 7th Cir No. 09-3940, 4/1/11 7th circuit decision, granting habeas relief in State v. Sussman, 2007AP687-CR; in chambers opinion on stay Habeas – Confrontation – Rape Shield and Prior False Allegation The state court unreasonably restricted Sussman’s cross-examination of his chief accuser, and thus violated his right to confrontation, by precluding… Read more
D. Hearsay
State v. Anthony M. Smith, 2009AP2867-CR, District 1/4, 3/3/11 court of appeals decision (not recommended for publication); for Smith: Rodney Cubbie, Syovata K. Edari; case activity Trial court’s limitations on cross-examination with respect to State witness’s “prior mental condition” or use of medications (prescribed for his Bipolar Disorder and Attention Deficit Disorder) upheld as proper exercise… Read more
Michigan v. Bryant, USSC No. 09-150 At respondent Richard Bryant’s trial, the court admitted statements that the victim, Anthony Covington, made to police officers who discovered him mortally wounded in a gas station parking lot. … We hold that the circumstances of the interaction between Covington and the police objectively indicate that the “primary purpose of… Read more
State v. Mark D. Jensen, 2011 WI App 3; prior history: 2007 WI 26; for Jensen: Terry W. Rose, Christopher William Rose, Michael D. Cicchini; case activity; (Jensen BiC not posted); State Resp.; Jensen Reply Confrontation – Generally The Confrontation Clause regulates testimonial statements only, such that nontestimonial statements are excludable only under hearsay and other evidence-rule ¶¶22-26, citing Giles v… Read more
Docket Decision Below (New Mexico supreme court) Question Presented: Whether the Confrontation Clause permits the prosecution to introduce testimonial statements of a nontestifying forensic analyst through the in-court testimony of a supervisor or other person who did not perform or observe the laboratory analysis described in the statements. Cert. Petition State’s Brief Opposing Cert SCOTUSblog… Read more
decision below: unpublished; prior On Point post; for Rhodes: John J. Grau Issue (from Table of Pending Cases): Whether a criminal defendant’s constitutional right to confront a witness in cross-examination was infringed, and, if so, whether the infringement was harmless error. Homicide case, tried on State’s theory Rhodes had motive to kill victim for beating Rhodes’… Read more
Docket Decision Below (New Mexico supreme court) Question Presented: Whether the Confrontation Clause permits the prosecution to introduce testimonial statements of a nontestifying forensic analyst through the in-court testimony of a supervisor or other person who did not perform or observe the laboratory analysis described in the statements. Cert. Petition State’s Brief Opposing Cert SCOTUSblog… Read more
7th circuit decision Habeas – Limits on Cros-Examination State court limitation on impeachment of a witness — so as to exclude that portion of a pre-trial conversation containing the defendant’s “self-serving,” thus inadmissible hearsay, statement — wasn’t an unreasonable application of controlling caselaw. Determination of whether “state interests, including those reflected in the state’s evidentiary… Read more
